Editor:
It's interesting on this Earth Day of 2010 to read about what passes for "sustainable development" according to government and industry. Exactly how such an investment of taxpayers' money is going to bring society an improved environment, secure jobs or anything of lasting benefit is a mystery to me.
Investing public money in a pulp mill seems to make about as much financial sense as investing it in a South American goldmine. And any green benefit is pure fantasy, but makes for great PR. Howe Sound Pulp and Paper still produces plenty of toxins and airborne contaminates, which is doubly troubling when pulping technologies exist to virtually eliminate them.
And how is a surplus of energy (renewable or otherwise) of any benefit to the public? It will be sold to BC Hydro and auctioned off to the highest bidder. That will pad the pockets of shareholders and sustain obscene salaries for board members, but will never translate into a net benefit for most of us.
Critics would say such a view is too cynical of the slow, small-steps approach that government and industry have to take in order to not create too many adjustment shocks in our economy. All I can say to that is I'd rather be a healthy skeptic than a gullible fool.
What's really disturbing with so-called green trends like this isn't so much that they amount to nothing more than empty platitudes, as to how they demonstrate how little true vision our leaders really have. But as long as the top decision making posts are held by people weaned almost exclusively on law, business and economics continues, we can look forward to more of the same for a long time yet.
Shaun Berryman
Gibsons
